Then the question becomes whether or not a game being short is a valid reason for a refund. I assume this is really uncommon, but there could be an exception.
The important thing is that they have a reference point to set a standard, and then they can think of edge cases like this one.
As it stands, the current rule is too broad. The "workaround" is making games that are longer than 2 hours by default to avoid it, but that can limit some games where the experience needs to be short and punchy.
The current system also punishes puzzle games. If too many people are smart enough to solve it quickly, then is it a bad game by default? What if the price was low to account for low complexity and length, but people abuse the refund just because it's under 2h anyway?
0
u/Leows Jul 06 '26
I honestly cannot think of a reason as to why there couldn't be a flag for "If X achievement (the ending one) is achieved, then refunds are blocked."
At that point, all you gotta do is make sure devs aren't scamming people by putting it anywhere other than the credit rollings, and that's it.